Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.9.1a is out! (05/10/19); Blog post: Painting the Stars (02/07/20)

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - StahnAileron

Pages: [1]
1
Suggestions / UI Streamlining (For Repetitive Actions/Tasks)
« on: December 15, 2018, 05:27:02 PM »
Is there a possibility of changing the hotkeys fro some things to make life faster? In particular, I'm talking about the UI keys for surveying and the salvage screen.

First, I have no idea why G/Q (survey) and T/R/G (salvage) were chosen. Salvage kinda makes sense (they're close together on a US keyboard), but survey's reasoning eludes me.

Since most of the dialogue in game can be controlled via the number keys, I kinda wish these screens (survey/salvage) could use them as well.

For survey, I cold just mash the "1" key to cycle through all the menus quickly to survey a planet. "2" would be leave while "3" could be colonize after surveying (so a player wouldn't get the colonize screen by mashing "1" too often).

Salvaging could be "1" for "Take All", "2" for "Confirm and Continue", with "3" for "Abort".

A player goes through these menus VERY often. Considering where your hands are for most of the game (for most players with default controls, by WASD and on the mouse), constantly used commands should be closers (especially given the dialogue system.)

Otherwise, please enable full customization of the UI/hotkeys for all menus/interfaces.

2
Suggestions / Hyperspace Navigation Buoys
« on: December 02, 2018, 10:01:00 AM »
In 0.9a, we can possibly build Comm Relays, Nav Buoys, and/or Sensors within a star system.

However, given the procedural nature of Sector creation, getting to any said star system could be a chore due to Deep Hyperspace Storms (especially now with the "Burn Drive on Storm Hit" mechanic possible throwing you WAY off-course). Once you find a path through hyperspace to key locations (e.g. your faction systems, Level 3 *REDACTED*-infested farms *ahem* systems, you won't always remember how to get there easily again without flipping back and forth to the map (which can be very rough for finding clear spots in hyperspace).

So, I propose a player being able to build Navigation Beacons/Buoys in hyperspace. They don't do anything other than draw a line between themselves (hopefully player defined...) as a visual navigation aid to the player so they know what path to take to whatever destination the player has mapped out.

If it seems like it won't be much of a gameplay balance issue, the Navigation skill could add some bonuses, like:
  • Add an extra burn level when traveling along the marked path (aka corridor)
  • Reducing the burn penalty of traveling on a corridor through deep hyperspace
  • Locking the benefits to the buoy owner and allies (which would then make then destructible/steal-able, like the in-system stuff; might not be a good "benefit/bonus", but I'm just throwing things out there)
  • Any fleet traveling along the corridor is detected (hyperspace traffic control, if you will; perhaps only if their IFF is on)
This would require some sort of interface (probably in Command) to manage the "connections" between Buoys so a player can define the actual paths they want rather than letting the game guess.

I would say it'd be nice to have pre-made marked navigation corridors on sector creation so the player has something to work with early on, but that might be difficult to code into the sector creation script.

On a side note: Having marked navigation corridors would be something pirates and other unscrupulous faction could exploit to raid convoys. Travel down a corridor, minding your own business, when BAM! A pirate fleet lurking in a deep hyperspace cloud jumps you! Or, closer to the core worlds, there are faction patrols along corridors. Could be good or bad depending on your activities.

3
Bug Reports & Support / Freighter Behavior (Pirate Plunder Fleet)
« on: September 22, 2013, 01:12:35 PM »
I'm finding that with Pirate Plunder Fleets, the AI thinks the Freighters are combat ready, so they try to Engage even if they are the only CR-viable ships left. This is usually the case after a fight since the AI keeps them in reserve during the initial battle phase. However, when I re-engage the Freighter-only fleet (along with the mothballed ships it's transporting), the AI doesn't deploy ANY ships at all. I have to deploy at least one combat capable ship to get the "Enemy Defeated" message (sadly, tugs don't count.) They will continue to do this on engagement unless I leave or I harry the reserves after each engagement until their CR rating is below deployable levels. This is a waste of my fleet's CR rating since I have to deploy a ship to harry them low enough to actually fight them. Letting them go and intercepting them again produces the ENGAGE > NO DEPLOY > DEFEATED > HARRY cycle again.

On a somewhat related note, I've noticed that sometimes, freighter CR ratings aren't displayed at the dialogue screen. I'm not sure if this is a bug or if their CR rating is so low that it takes 2-3 harry's before their actual CR rating falls below their max CR.

Both cases involve the Tarsus freighter, if that helps.

4
Suggestions / Hull Mod Proposal - Vectored Thrust
« on: August 18, 2012, 04:32:02 PM »
Does anyone else feel like strafing in SF is a bit... underwelming? It works all right for smaller, faster ships (I think. It's been a while since I bothered since it's just faster and easier to just turn and burn instead.) But it's pretty useless for larger ships, though I can sorta understand why. So here is my proposal for a new Hull Mod:

"Vectored Thrust Engines - Some of the ship's main engine thrust output is redirected to side exhaust ports, increasing lateral (strafe) speed at the cost of cruising (forward/reverse) speeds."

I was originally thinking of a 33% - 50% decrease to top speed, but your strafe speed would match your new top speed. Cost in OP would be somewhere between Aux Thrusters and Augmented Engines. But thinking back on it, I'm not sure if that's very balanced or not. My other idea for balancing it would be like a 10%-25% top speed decrease and loss of like 10% flux venting capacity for maybe a 50% increase in strafe speed. ("Some flux vents on the ships are now used as engine exhaust nozzles, increasing lateral speeds.")

Or some other combination of numbers for buff (strafe speed) and nerf (top speed or even vent rate, like Aug Engines.) Maybe even use per-class/size numbers (like Aug Engines' speed boost: a flat +40/+30/+20/+10 depending on hull size/class). Half the reason I'm submitting this idea is for feedback on balancing it. Please don't take the number I just pulled off the top of my head here as serious suggestions for the actual buff/nerf numbers. They are simply examples to give you a rough idea of what I had in mind for effects with the hull mod.

Thoughts and (hopefully constructive...) criticisms?

5
I've been playing vanilla 0.53a for the past week or so regularly. I just got around to testing out a fleet of frigates (Hyperions and Omens) with a CapShip as my flagship (Paragon). Systems definitely flip the balance of fights into some odd situations sometimes (chasing down a Burndriving ship that's trying to escape sucks...) Anyway...

Orders vs Combat:
I think I mentioned this before, but ships seem to prioritize chasing and fighting things near them instead of doing what you tell them to do. This mostly comes into play most when insteading Capture/Assault command on a CapPoint and the ships keep wandering off to fight fighters and other enemy ships in the area instead of staying near the poin to actually, you know, capture it... Now, I do understand that officer trait will come into play later in the game (once implemented). From what little I know of the plan for them, there will be officers that have this behavioral pattern. Still, until they get implemented, I'd like ships to actually do what their told instead of having a case of ADD and chasing after the first "butterfly" they see.

BTW, the above also happens when telling ships to engage a specific ship or rally/defend waypoint. If they're engaged, they'll KEEP fighting until the their current engagement is over with before carrying out the order given. I get that turning tail might be a bad idea in some situations, but it's absurd for a Hyperion (or three) with extended shields and elite crew to not just teleport the hell away to disengage from a fight (with an Onslaught I'm distracting using my Paragon) when ordered to do something else. Especially when it has the flux to do so.

On a related note, I kinda wish the ships would be on a tighter "leash" when using the Defend command on Capture Points. They sometimes wander too far away and wind up leaving the point actually undefended (one ship I can understand, but having 3-5 ships do that on one point kinda irritating...)

In general, I don't mind ships fighting back while carrying out an order. It's them focusing on the fighting when told to do something else that annoys me. I'd rather have:
  • "Oh! There's an enemy frigate in my flight path to my destination. I'll only consider return or opportunity fire. I don't need to chase him down," instead of
  • "OH~! ENEMY FRIGATE! HUNT HIM DOWN! KILL! KILL! KILL!

There's also the fact ships tend to ping-pong between attacking targets (whichever happens to be closer) instead of concentrating on one target and finishing off the ship they've weakened to near-dead. It sucks when you have 2 Onslaughts and a Dominator bunched close together and all your ships are spreading their fire across all three enemy ships as they change relative distances.

Piloting/Flight Pathing:
So I find the AI still tends to love flying right into/across my firing line on a ship I'm targetting. This has been compounded by some of the systems, like Phase Teleporters/Skimmers. I'm unloading a salvo of Auto-Pulse/Pulse fire on an Onslaught... And one (or two) of my Hyperions decide to take a "shortcut" across my firing line while trying to circle strafe that Onslaught.

In another case, I had a Hyperion teleport right in front of me JUST as I unloaded on a targetted ship. He got killed enough to be obliterated/destroyed instead of just disabled. This seems to be partly due to the AI's (usually excellent) tendency to teleport into a ship's unshielded arc.

Is there any chance of getting the AI to avoid flying between the player's ship and any ship s/he has targetting and within range of getting hit by the players weapons (or 1000 range, give or take)? The AI seems MUCH better at avoiding collisions now (especially the Hyperion), but it seems very oblivious to friendly-fire situations with the player. It doesn't seem to have many issues about friendly-fire in regards to other AI-controlled vessels.

6
Bug Reports & Support / Crew Bonus to Travel Speed
« on: May 20, 2012, 06:29:47 PM »
So elite crew is supposed to boost both travel and combat speed by the same percentage, correct? That's what the in-game tooltip says. So why is my Paragon only getting +1 to travel speed?

Another thread says that travel speed is calculated as:

SPDC/2 + 100 = SPDT

take combat speed divide it by 2 and then add 100.. you have travel speed.

I'm guessing since it's calculated on-the-fly, it's done as:

CREWB* SPDC/ 2 + 100 = SPDT

...instead of:

CREWB* (SPDC/ 2 + 100 = SPDT)

Give or take any rounding. Was this intended as it is currently or is the second formula what it's supposed to be? 116.5 vs 126.5 for a Paragon's travel speed is fairly significant. The same applies tro all the other ships' travel speeds. (e.g. Elite crew only give a +5 bonus to a Medusa: 150 base, 155 w/ Elite Crew.) According to the displayed in-game stats, we're technically missing 10 travel speed on each ship with elite crew.

7
I caught a small fleet of fast ships (Tempest, Wasps) with my larger fleet, so they decided to "break through" and escape. I'm finding that try evade by trying to fly off to the sides  (trying to maintain a distance of about 1000-1500 minimum from any of my ships) before trying to head back toward my side of the field.

Problem: if my ships can keep up with them pretty well (I had Tempests deployed), they KEEP flying off to the side, past the edge of the battlefield, THEN continue southward once they are at their safe minimum distance of 1000-1500 away from any of my vessels. My vessels, on the other hand, can't/won't travel beyond the visible bounds of the battlefield.

So in other words: there's an exploit/bug that fast AI vessels can use to run away during a breakthrough goal that players can't counter at all. My ships will stop and back up once they pass the map edges if they'r not ordered to retreat. The same restriction doesn't seem to affect enemy ships. Screenshot attached to show the situation.

[attachment deleted by admin]

Pages: [1]